Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Optimo rouge

Jim has said yes, future-safe.
 
I do have a concern about this too. The clearance between the rear element and the RED One OLPF is very slight. What if future camera designs force a different OLPF position?

It may be future proof for the time being, through the currently planned Epic and Scarlet brains, but what of beyond that? I don't think anyone can answer that question yet.
 
Mitch Gross said:
Jim has said yes, future-safe.
Click to expand...

This seem good enough??

This is what Jim stated and he is good at keeping his word. I remember the thread that promted Jim to answer as I was very interested in the answer. I have purchased an Optimo Dp (and I will get a 2nd) of the back of that answer..

As for beyond Epic and scarlet? Even the PL mount isn't safe for ever...

regards

Michael L
 
True, even PL mount isn't safe forever. And while I don't have any doubts over what Jim has said, we have no guarantees from other camera makers.

That said, I'm still very very interested in that upcoming Optimo Rouge 16-42. It's quite a bit cheaper than the 15-40 and appears to offer all the goods of being an Optimo. The trade off for the lower price appears to be some differently sized internal elements and relocation of the rear element further back.
 
Rouge are HD lenses. They are not Red "exclusive" (though they were named in a very marketing way like so ;) but are suitable for any HD camera. You just can't use them with a film camera.

Not my 2 cents but what the Angenieux people in France told me when they put one on my Red for a trade show...
 
Optimo Rouge 16-42 is nice. Good quality and looks good on the RED. It is a T2.8. We were flying it today and everyone was happy with it. Great for steady cam.
 
I like the range but at 2.8 its just too slow for me. I dont ever have budgets or time for massive lighting set ups so faster lenses always help. even a 2.2
would work most of the time.
 
Lewis-M Soucy said:
Rouge are HD lenses. They are not Red "exclusive" (though they were named in a very marketing way like so ;) but are suitable for any HD camera. You just can't use them with a film camera.

Not my 2 cents but what the Angenieux people in France told me when they put one on my Red for a trade show...
Click to expand...

They will only work with focal plane sensor cameras like the RED. They won't work on B4 mount 3-chip cameras.
 
J. Eric Camp said:
Optimo Rouge 16-42 is nice. Good quality and looks good on the RED. It is a T2.8. We were flying it today and everyone was happy with it. Great for steady cam.
Click to expand...

Good to know. I'm very interested in it for steadicam and compact handheld rigs.

Will you guys be mounting it on other cameras at all? My biggest concern with this lens is making it ROI itself within a year or so in this goofy market I'm in. I'll have to rent it out for use on cameras other than the RED One and we all know that cameras with mechanical shutters are out of the question. I've also heard that the lens is unusable on certain adapter systems where the ground glass can be too close to the rear element, like the P+S mini and pro 35mm. So, with film cameras out, Sony F35 out, P+S pro 35 out, etc.. I'm thinking this lens doesn't even make sense for me or anyone else who will need to mount it on much of anything besides a RED One.

I'd just go for the Optimo 15-40 instead -- I would love to have that lens, but it's another one that typically sells for more than $50K on the used market.
 
Zakaree Sandberg said:
I either want the 2 rouge lenses.. or one 17-80 optimo... the later is probably the better choice as far as renting it out goes...
Click to expand...

17-80 Optimo is a HIGH demand lens for sure.

but ... if you like to do math ...rouge rentals are currently $400 a day for the 30-80mm. I expect when folks get their 16-42mm they will be the same. Lens is approx. $20K. That's about a 50 rental day ROI - even if you gave everyone a 20% discount - you are still looking at a 63 ish rental day ROI. Which, IMO, is great.

The 17-80 rents for $550 a day - costs a hell of lot more than $20K.

I also expect many folks to rent BOTH Rouge lenses together. You can offer a discount for taking both lenses together - for say ... $650 a day - which is what we will do. So if folks are shooting two cameras can spend a tiny bit more than 17-80 and get two separate zooms.

I think if you invest in the two Rouge lenses - you can make enough to finance or purchase the 17-80 as well. I guess that depends on your market. There are still not enough lenses in NYC to cover the amount of work that shoots here.

We've been shooting with a pre-release 16-42 Rouge for the past few days - and it's a steal at $20K.

If you order a 16-42mm Optimo Rouge TODAY ... your estimated ship date is JULY 2009.

Just a thought.
 
Mark is special. I once tried to buy one of those matteboxes and was told I couldn't have one.


@ Mark, thanks for the info on the rentals, etc.. I'm looking into it, but I don't know if I could get $400/day out of a Rouge in this town. The Optimo 15-40 is a $360/day lens here. Most rental customers looking for PL mount glass are shooting film. The RED One is still some newfangled contraption in these parts and most local producers and DP's still view the workflow as a sort of voodoo. I'm slowly converting them, one at a time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top